LETTERS

Park tug of war

“Time to act” (Opinion, July 1) correctly suggests making Balboa Park more accessible to pedestrians. Then it goes off the deep end with that often-promoted, false premise that the heart of the park was for the exclusive use of pedestrians. The western approach was built back in 1914 for cars to pass through the two plazas from a marketing standpoint – being able to preview the plazas whether in a tour bus or auto.

The main problem is parking in the Plaza de Panama with cars circling around looking for a space to park. Both the park’s Master Plan and Precise Plan address that by removing parking in that plaza. The plan’s designers also rejected a bypass bridge.

The Plaza de Panama project would create more dangerous conflicts both at the juncture of the bypass bridge and in the Alcazar drop-off and handicapped parking lot. The project is fiscally irresponsible, as its maintenance would be added to the park’s $240 million already in arrears.

Jarvis Ross

San Diego

I agree with Welton Jones’ assertion that we don’t want or need to “build big stuff like new bridges” to celebrate the centennial of Balboa Park (“Aerial trams among ideas for anniversary celebration”). What we do need is to take care of what we already have. Several features of the park are in need of restoration, repair and maintenance. This would be the greatest gift to the people of San Diego.

I fear, as Bruce Coons pointed out, that we may be celebrating the centennial of a city landmark that we no longer recognize. Sure, let’s get rid of the parking spaces in front of the Museum of Art and create a public space, but let’s be smart and learn from previous generations’ past mistakes and not make radical changes that we will regret in years to come.

Marshall Williams

Hillcrest

As an architect and planner, I’m intensely aware that opportunities to create or restore grand public spaces are extremely rare. I’m especially bothered by the argument that this project should be opposed on historical preservation grounds. The integrity of the place that was the Plaza de Panama was lost long ago.

The current proposal is a unique opportunity to regain one of San Diego’s most historic and important places. To reject such an opportunity based on an argument of historic preservation only adds insult to the injury of what has been lost.

Robert Schulz

El Cajon

A hand and a cross

In response to Steve Breen’s July 1 editorial cartoon: I thought the U-T San Diego and Breen were all for keeping the Mount Soledad cross on public land because, among other things, it’s a war memorial, which would be constitutional, and not a religious symbol, which would violate the Constitution.

So I found it ironic that the cartoon shows the hand of God on the cross. Or is that the hand of a combat casualty?

Dan Krinsky

Pacific Beach

I would modify Steve Breen’s cartoon of the cross on Mount Soledad, replacing the three men trying to pull the cross down with Thomas Jefferson, who penned the First Amendment, and James Madison, the father of the Constitution. The hand at the top trying to stop the cross from coming down would be the Church of England.